May 26, 2009 10:01pm
Sotomayor, Considered
EmailHere’s our World News report on the president’s Supreme Court nominee:
And Jan Crawford Greenburg takes a look at some of the controversies Judge Sotomayor may be asked about:
- jpt
Here’s our World News report on the president’s Supreme Court nominee:
And Jan Crawford Greenburg takes a look at some of the controversies Judge Sotomayor may be asked about:
- jpt
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Identity politics. She’s far from the best qualified for the job, but she’s perfectly qualified to meet the demographics Obama needs to gain power for his party.
It’s not about what’s right for the country, but what’s right for Obama. Politics as usual, not “change we can believe in”.
Posted by: paul | May 26, 2009, 10:31 pm 10:31 pm
Judge Sotomayor is the BEST QUALIFIED FOR THE JOB!!!
America’s Diveristy is taking shape for the “change we can ALL believe in”.
Don’t HATE, CONGRATULATE JUDGE SOTOMAYOR!!!
Posted by: sisterdearest09 | May 26, 2009, 11:11 pm 11:11 pm
It’s not about what’s right for the country, but what’s right for Obama. Politics as usual, not “change we can believe in”.
Posted by: paul | May 26, 2009 10:31:13 PM
*********************
You could not be more wrong if you tried. The only thing ‘Politics as usual” is your post. Sotomayor”s qualifications are off the charts. She has been a prosecutor, private litigator, trial judge, and appellate judge. No one on the Court right now has that level and depth of experience.
Posted by: Padma | May 27, 2009, 12:10 am 12:10 am
Thanks Jake. If nothing else, you give us a balance look. Keep up the good work.
Posted by: BigGator5 | May 27, 2009, 5:47 am 5:47 am
Her ruling in Ricci vs. DeStefano is scary. The Consitution should be color blind, because if it isn’t that policy can cut both ways.
Jose Cabranes lambasted her for that decision.
Posted by: drjohn | May 27, 2009, 6:59 am 6:59 am
Sotomayor is going to be confirmed because of Obama’s popularity and the insistence from the left that laws be flexible and not applied uniformly.
From the WSJ:
“But these men saw themselves as judges first and ethnic representatives second. Judge Sotomayor’s belief is that a “Latina woman” is by definition a superior judge to a “white male” because she has had more “richness” in her struggle. The danger inherent in this judicial view is that the law isn’t what the Constitution says but whatever the judge in the “richness” of her experience comes to believe it should be.”
Posted by: drjohn | May 27, 2009, 7:07 am 7:07 am
She’s scary!
Posted by: Ned | May 27, 2009, 7:28 am 7:28 am
drjohn………you are correct, The Constitution SHOULD be color-blind, but unfortunately it never has been.
Where was all of this “color-blind” talk when my parents and grand-parents were being treat like crap?
Posted by: Paul | May 27, 2009, 7:34 am 7:34 am
Her ruling in Ricci vs. DeStefano is scary.
Posted by: drjohn | May 27, 2009 6:59:48 AM
Yes, scary for right-wingers who use this as their mantra against her. Who better to defend the white male than the party that’s only got those members remaining?
By the way – the appeals courts agree with her on scrapping the test. Do you want a firefighter who can write down what he is supposed to do or one who can actually perform those abilities in the field?
Posted by: Padma | May 27, 2009, 8:42 am 8:42 am
From the WSJ:
“But these men saw themselves……
Posted by: drjohn | May 27, 2009 7:07:35 AM
**********************
The News Division of the WSJ would probably appreciate your understanding the difference between a news article and the opinion pieces (from which you quoted) in their paper.
Posted by: Padma | May 27, 2009, 8:57 am 8:57 am
“Jose Cabranes lambasted her for that decision.”
Gee the single dissenting opinion in a case being harsh on the MAJORITY opinion.
That never happens.
Get some new talking points.
Posted by: Ryan C | May 27, 2009, 5:29 pm 5:29 pm
“The Constitution SHOULD be color-blind, but unfortunately it never has been.
Where was all of this “color-blind” talk when my parents and grand-parents were being treat like crap?”
Right wingers don’t care about people being 2nd class citizens.
Its anything that remotely threatens their perception that white people are entitled to certain things and that sharing them with minorities is wrong.
Posted by: Ryan C | May 27, 2009, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm
Ryan C: “Right wingers don’t care about people being 2nd class citizens.”
Of course we do, but you should understand that this isn’t about 2nd class citizens. This is about appointing a Supreme Court Justice who believes justice is blind and judges not letting race or gender influence their decisions. Stop complicating the issue with your conspiracy theories.
Ryan C: “Its anything that remotely threatens their perception that white people are entitled to certain things and that sharing them with minorities is wrong.”
I’m not even going to take this comment seriously. In fact, this reminds me of that Eddie Murphy SNL skit where he dresses up as the white businessman only to find a whole world of white-favoritism and privilege that is hidden away from minorities. Even this simple comedy skit of the 80s out-dates your antiquated, divisive, offensive views on race and politics.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2009, 9:51 pm 9:51 pm